How Does JN Do It?

Posted on January 5 2010by admin2

How Does JN Do It? Peas, Perceiving, Perseverance, and Phenotypes

Though Jon Niednagel and BTI are diligently working to precisely identify the 16 different BTs by scientific methods alone (genetics, neuroimaging/mapping, and biomechanical analysis), how has JN assessed people the empirical way so accurately over these many years? Much more is explained elsewhere, but in this short piece, we want to provide you a succinct explanation and analogy.

Anyone who attempts to even minimally understand BT will realize that BT is devoted to identifying inborn traits/skills—mental (cognitive), physical (motor), and spatial (visual). Since each BT has its own and unique neural circuitry (minor, not major) in the brain, all people the world over—sharing the same BT—will have similar innate tendencies in these three significant areas. (Measuring someone’s personality or psychological bent is not BTI’s mission; rather it is to understand what is considered “Nature,” not “Nurture.”)

Generally noticing how each person around you speaks, looks, moves, and sees is not a difficult task. Meticulously and painstakingly noticing each person in your presence daily is a much more overwhelming task. From a BT perspective, only a person strong in the back of the brain (true Introversion), one who’s left brained dominant—the conscious and methodical hemisphere, having a mind fixated on “what is” (Sensing), not “what could be,” and being more predisposed to logic (Thinking) than feelings could actually endure this grueling venture over a number of decades. Such is and has been JN.

Have you ever heard of Gregor Mendel?

No, Mendel isn’t a goalie in the NHL, nor a past musician/composer, or even a head of state in Europe. Rather he was a 19th century monk, known for making a remarkable discovery regarding plants and principles of heredity

The renowned Gregor Mendel and BTI’s Jonathan P. Niednagel have some specific traits and experiences in common. Let’s briefly consider their similarities from a more recent scientific book that sheds light on the special abilities of a person like Mendel (and JN). The 21st century book, “Brave New Brain: Conquering Mental Illness in the Era of the Genome,” is authored by M.D. and Ph.D., Nancy Andreasen.

Consider some of Dr. Andreasen’s comments:

“Human beings have observed for many years that normal and abnormal traits are transmitted within families—e.g., eye color, hair color, . . . . The process by which much of this transmission occurs was formalized through the painstaking observations (emphasis ours) of Gregor Mendel, an Austro-Hungarian monk who was also a superb amateur botanist.”

“In the mid-1860s, he conducted meticulous experiments . . .” on plant life.

“The ingenious monk . . . “

“Mendel’s observations, which we now refer to as ‘classic Mendilian patterns of transmission,’ created the framework within which genes and genetic transmission are currently understood. Mendel did not know he was studying the effects of genes, because the word ‘gene’ had not yet been coined. He was observing ‘traits’ or ‘factors’.”

“This Austrian monk was able to simply observe what happened to his peas based on experimental manipulation, and to deduce the principles of genetics . . . when he did not know that genes existed! All he could see were plants that varied on multiple traits . . . .”

“We can summarize Mendel’s observations and conclusions by using modern terminology. Mendel was observing the phenotype, but behind the phenotype was a genotype.”

“Mendel could not see the genotype—only the phenotype. Nonetheless, he inferred the presence of something that must represent a genotype, since this was the most plausible explanation of the patterns of transmission that he was observing.”

Mendel was an amazing and exceptional monk (and amateur botanist). His longtime fascination with plants resulted in observations never before noticed. His empirical approach provided the foundation for modern genetics.

Similarly, JN’s nearly 30-plus years of painstakingly scrutinizing individual and inborn human traits—cognitive, motor and spatial—has also brought about a new and dynamic understanding. We are convinced it is soon to become a 21st century “hard” science.

BTI recently received the following testimonial from a clinical psychologist and Ph.D. He has carefully studied Brain Typing, spoken to JN regarding it, and applied it in his practice. He writes:

“Jon excels in the most powerful of all research methods, the power of observation. He is devoting his career to confirming his exceptional insights through objective clinical measures. I really believe he is a man ahead of his time and onto something very powerful.”

Just as Mendel “saw” only what is now known to be a “phenotype,” he “inferred thepresence of something that must represent a genotype, since this was the most plausible explanation of the patterns of transmission that he was observing.”

JN similarly “inferred” or deduced (over 25 years ago) from what is now called Brain Typing “the presence of something that must represent a genotype, since this was the most plausible explanation of the patterns that he was observing.”

JN discovered that for the mental, motor, and spatial skills to be regularly repeated by those of the same Brain Type, yet having different ages, sexes, and people groups (what are commonly and inappropriately referred to as “races”), it mandated a genetic basis.

Identifying the DNA components of each BT in the 21st century is a far more arduous task than examining Mendel’s plant traits. Nonetheless, BTI is committed to finishing the genetic task it began in the mid-1990s. We, and some highly educated and respected scientists, are giving our best to bring it about.

If you desire to know more specifically the empirical approach JN has developed over these many years for identifying each BT, refer to the BTI website for products and material.